Friday, November 22, 2013

Emasculation can be defined as a raping of the male identity engaging in
the stripping of dignity and integrity presenting irresponsibility and low
productivity. As a Caribbean people we have been affected by the history of the
pre and post-colonial periods

There is need to agree on a sociological framework that would support
the definition and give credence for rehabilitation. We have to observe basic
foundational perspectives that have been alive since the creation of man. Allow
me to present the biblical perspective that is an acceptable worldview in spite
of the many theologies and persuasions. Therefore it would be prudent to say
that God made man and made him in his image and likeness. It would be also
necessary for this presentation to say that He God made man male and female as
two distinct personalities in the now sociological dimension of masculinity and
femininity.

In the context of historical evolution we see that man has been exposed
to several interpretations and experiences that have not allowed him to perfect
his ideals, aspirations and in total his potentiality.

The eras have shown that male man had been caught in a pendulum swing
showing their strength in the many wars that have been won, the many
inventions, the scientific and technological discoveries, historical icons but
yet in the home and in the community there is another cry. The world has
greatly benefited from the wisdom of men, we cannot speak to the contrary; but
alas there is a cry that we male have not achieved and to use the expression,
‘we are no good’.

In a Caribbean context we are even more so lamed. Yes, we have had great
sons proving to the world that there is intellectual prowess, yet we have the
other cry – where are the men?

In the post-colonial days, we see the struggle of the black man striving
to survive in a foreign world, a world of opportunity but yet full of
discrimination and despair. There has been the opportunity of skill but yet
marginalized within a context of ethnic preference.

The period of slavery showed a definite mismanagement of the family
members and created the need to redefine the terms of reference of the family.
The abuse of the female slaves and the indifference to the value systems bore a
dynasty of sexual abandonment which produced misappropriate behaviour. The
institution was largely ridiculed by the slaves and eventually the sanction of
marriage was almost unknown.[1] This
phenomenon was experienced in the Caribbean and gravely affected countries like
Jamaica which later showed the increase in prostitution and unstable relations
thus further affecting the base of the family social structure.

The post-colonial period saw some distinct change in the structure of
society where the matrifocal based homes were found and that man/ fathers were
not at all significant in the rearing and caring of the child/children. The
woman/mother usually assumed the role as head of the home making the man’s
domestic routine marginal. This is consistent with the conflict perspective
where the family becomes an oppressive institution – a status quo of unequal
power relations between the man and the woman and also of people of different
age groups. It also defines poverty rates between racial and ethnic groups
upholding gender inequity within the family.

The structural functionalist is definitely appalled by this as his
theory of the regulated family with proper sexual behaviour, protection of
members, personality development and placement of members proposes to offer
society control and stability.[2] This
theory provided integration and a smooth working society. This explains the
reality of economic stability and a balanced social structure which transcends
the fragmented family structures within the society.[3] There is a
fierce argument to show that structural functionalism has loop holes because
the reality of the effects of colonialism has created other real situations
which show that the family has gone through and is still experiencing
injustices as cited before. There is a real world of divorce, separation,
remarriage and battered children. Social problems are real within the context
of the family and we definitely cannot support the functionalist theories. We
need to present solutions to alleviate the pressures created and to
sociologically discuss how to preserve the unit.[4]